Here's the last part of my conversation with Warriors co-owner Joe Lacob yesterday, which I'm posting separately from the discussion of the team's personnel moves because, well, this is a wholly different topic.

And, given the adrenaline-spiked atmosphere of the Warriors' acquisitions of Andre Iguodala & Co., this is a VERY different mood: For a lot of reasons, things aren't going nearly so buoyantly for the ownership group's plans to build an arena at Piers 30/32 in San Francisco by 2017.

As Lacob points out, most of these obstacles were expected before the Warriors ever announced their intentions -- the politics and the logistics of building on a decrepit Bay pier was never going to be easy and the Warriors knew they would have to jump through a hundred hoops before they even started the physical process.

My point: The accumulation of problems -- expected and unexpected -- seems to be making it clear that the 2017 target date (which was always an optimistic projection) is likely to be pushed to 2018 or probably a few years beyond.

And it's still an open question whether the Warriors remain focused on that site; Lacob and co-owner Peter Guber have said that it's possible to re-start talks with the Giants about building on Lot A next to AT&T Park and other sources mention Pier 50 near McCovey Cove as a potential site.

(Lacob himself says Pier 50 is out of the question, but I'm assuming everything's negotiable.)

What's the most likely alternative temporary option? The Warriors could negotiate an extension to their lease in Oakland (which expires in 2017), either for the standard five-year re-up or for fewer years, depending on the discussions.

And my sense is that Lacob and Guber were so thrilled with the atmosphere at Oracle during the playoffs that staying in the East Bay for a few extra years doesn't seem as frustrating to them as it once did.

So: Unless the Warriors make dramatic progress in the next few months (Lacob says they have about 18 months to nail down the approvals, which would theoretically allow them to start building in 2015), moving to a new SF arena by 2017 just isn't realistic.

And maybe even if the GSWs are closing on a deal by, say, January 2015, the actual physical structure might take longer than 2-plus years to build.

I'm not being cynical here, just realistic.

I'll put it this way: When someone as abundantly optimistic in public as Lacob concedes that "I do know there's a possibility, certainly, that it could be delayed," then there are real concerns about 2017.

So yes, me being me, I brought up my wager with 49ers owner Jed York about the Santa Clara stadium getting finished by 2014; a wager that I have conceded, by the way.

And I'm not sure, but I think I offered that same bet to Lacob for 2014, and I think he accepted. I might owe 'em both a meal at the French Laundry (UH OH).

Joe Lacob interview snippet

Q: OK, I'm hearing more and more that it's unlikely you're going to get that new arena built in San Francisco by 2017. That the timeframe is going to have to be pushed back. Are you still saying you can build at Piers 30/32 and open by 2017?

LACOB: I think it's still too early to say. We're working really hard to advance that project and we've made tremendous progress. Maybe you tweeted something about this project falling apart . . .

Q: No, didn't say that. All I've ever said is I don't think opening by 2017 is looking likely.

LACOB: OK. There's always a possibility we don't make it then. We're trying to do it. We try to set goals and we're pretty good at achieving our goals. I wouldn't count us out on this.

But the political process is complex and it's mainly the political stuff that's really complex, because the mayor, the people of San Francisco, the board of supervisors and many of the smaller groups, the labor in San Francisco, all are on our side, all supportive.

We have, I think, tremendous momentum. But there are politics involved with the East Bay, West Bay, and you're going to hear I'm sure even more controversy or questions from various people who don't want us to make that move and we're just going to have to deal with those questions and continue to advance the process.

I'm very, very happy with where we are. I know it's a very difficult process. I'm not nave.

I do know there's a possibility, certainly, that it could be delayed. It's not a probability at this point. The probability is that we achieve our goal.

Q: So is the issue with one of the architects (Bill Crockett) leaving the firm (AECOM) you're working with a major problem?

LACOB: The lead design architect for the project is Snohetta, a firm based in Oslo, Norway, and they continue to be actively working on the project.

The second architect, basically on the inside structure, is AECOM . . . And the work that we hired them for initially has been completed. And we're moving on, moving forward.

We're going to continue to, just like the team on the floor, to put the best people . . . on the job. That's how we're moving forward. Snohetta is the lead firm and AECOM has completed their work and we're moving forward.

Q: It just doesn't seem like you have enough time to get this done by 2017. A lot of obstacles.

LACOB: It's possible. We have a year to year and a half to get the approvals and to then begin construction sometime in '15 and still get it done.

Two years to actually build the arena. I think it's very possible, but I do admit that there are political things, political obstacles to overcome. But that's what we do, we overcome obstacles.

Q: Of course, the last time I got into a discussion like this with an owner, I ended up owing Jed York a lunch at the French Laundry over the Santa Clara stadium opening by 2014 . . .

LACOB: We've turned this team around; I wouldn't bet against us. If you want to bet me a meal at the French Laundry you can.

Q: For 2017? I guess, I'll do that.

LACOB: It's difficult. I think we can and we're going to try.

Read Tim Kawakami's Talking Points blog at blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami. Contact him at tkawakami@mercurynews.com.